In the realm of anti-drone warfare at sea, the challenge lies in creating a comprehensive kill chain that seamlessly integrates detection, identification, tracking, and hard-kill engagement. This intricate process demands a meticulous selection of sensors and effectors, each tailored to the unique physics and economics of the Tier 2 OWA drone threat. Mr. Hasan Özyurt, a Rear Admiral with expertise in naval systems, delves into this critical aspect in his insightful article.
The author emphasizes the importance of forward deployment, recognizing that defending against threats originating from the sea necessitates proactive measures along the threat axis. This principle underpins the three-tier framework: Tier 1 Counter-UAS, Tier 2 ADW, and Tier 3 Anti-Air Warfare. Each tier plays a distinct role, with Tier 2 ADW focusing on the critical challenge of detection and tracking.
Detection, the first and most arduous hurdle, is characterized by the radar cross-section (RCS) of Tier 2 OWA drones, which can be as low as 0.1 m², rendering them nearly invisible to legacy air search radars. Mr. Özyurt highlights the limitations of large naval AESA systems, which, despite their ability to detect targets with an RCS of 0.01 m², are too heavy, power-intensive, and expensive for scalable, forward-deployed screening solutions. Instead, compact AESA radar, purpose-designed for counter-UAS missions, emerges as the ideal solution.
These compact AESA designs offer detection and tracking capabilities within the SWaP envelope of small-to-medium Unmanned Surface Vessels (USVs). They provide 360-degree coverage, track multiple targets simultaneously, perform well in adverse weather conditions, and cover the entire speed range of OWA drones. By establishing a detection barrier across the maritime threat axis, these sensors enable early engagement, a crucial aspect of effective maritime ADW.
Moving on to identification and fire control, the Electro-Optic System (EOS) takes center stage. It must automatically slew to acquire targets visually, provide high-resolution data for hostile intent confirmation, and deliver continuous fire control. Mr. Özyurt stresses the importance of multi-spectral capability in the EOS, combining daylight, thermal, and SWIR channels to ensure positive identification at 5-10 km under various maritime conditions.
The choice between a high-end integrated EOS suite and a mid-tier compact director hinges on the effector carried. Semi-Active Laser (SAL) guided missiles require a coded laser designator and precise stabilization, while IR/IIR fire-and-forget effectors can utilize a mid-tier EOS focused on cueing and lock-on confirmation. The author's analysis reveals a clear preference for precision-guided light missiles in the SAL and IR/IIR categories, which offer high kill probability, fast reaction, sustainable cost-exchange, and proven USV compatibility.
In the realm of effectors, Mr. Özyurt navigates a complex landscape. He critiques the economic unsustainability of Tier 3 SAMs against mass campaigns, the physical constraints of guns and DEW on small unmanned craft, and the ineffectiveness of electronic warfare against autonomous Tier 2 OWA drones. The analysis concludes that precision-guided light missiles, with their complementary roles in SAL and IR/IIR categories, provide the optimal solution for hard-kill engagement.
In summary, Mr. Özyurt's article underscores the critical importance of matching sensors and effectors to the physical and economic realities of Tier 2 OWA drone threats. This meticulous approach ensures the closure of the maritime ADW kill chain, preventing the emergence of 'leakers' that could have devastating consequences against critical infrastructure.
